Blizzard, speech, and Capitalism

[The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile]

Except this is not just about China, this is about a large company giving up it morals in order to have access to a large market.

Morals? What morals? Blizzard is a company, they are not beholden to a moral code but to profit. And, although I admit that I am not familiar with the company, I am not aware of it having any kind of publicly professed moral that it stands by.

Blizzard was well within its rights to take action against Blitzchung. He consciously broke one of the clearly-stated rules. Can you really blame the company for trying to avoid controversy?

Video games are not designed to be a forum for political debate, just as companies are not, by their nature, democratic.

Also, my opinion on the Hong Kong controversy bears no weight on the matter. If Blizzard had suspended a player for supporting China, my stance would be the same.

[Neutraligon]

Except this is not just about China, this is about a large company giving up it morals in order to have access to a large market.

Morals? What morals? Blizzard is a company, they are not beholden to a moral code but to profit. And, although I admit that I am not familiar with the company, I am not aware of it having any kind of publicly professed moral that it stands by.

Blizzard was well within its rights to take action against Blitzchung. He consciously broke one of the clearly-stated rules. Can you really blame the company for trying to avoid controversy?

Video games are not designed to be a forum for debate, just as companies are not, by their nature, democratic.

Also, my opinion on the Hong Kong controversy bears no weight on the matter. If Blizzard had suspended a player for supporting China, my stance would be the same.

BLizzard lists out what they consider their own core principals. Speech is covered.

[Telconi]

And if I was a professional video game player and said that and got banned it's my own damn fault. Talk about what you're supposed to and everything will be fine.

And like I said, it could cover anything remotely controversial...or not. Based on that rule, they could state they won because they used thus and such mouse and it could still get them banned.

That's how that stuff works.

[Bear Stearns]

America needs to stop bending over for china, but then again we also let ourselves be abused by israel, Saudi Arabia and now Turkey as well. America is like mid 1800s china. A once powerful country now having its strings pulled by foreign interlopers vying for influence within our economy and politics. I know that only southpark will have the guts to give a middle finger to the Chinese Corporatist Party

This doesn’t necessarily mean the US needs to not have allies, though, they just need better ones. Steering clear of the Middle East could be good. I see a promising ally in Pakistan.

The US's first and foremost greatest allies will always be our kith and kin. Is it any coincidence that our greatest allies are Australia and the United Kingdom, followed by Canada. The only non-Anglo country that actually gives a shit about America is Poland.

Everyone else is a liability, or in the case of Israel, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, an enemy.

[The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile]

BLizzard lists out what they consider their own core principals. Speech is covered.

Yes, I found the core principles. I believe you're referring to one called "Every Voice Matters." Quote:

"Great ideas can come from anywhere. Blizzard Entertainment is what it is today because of the voices of our players and of each member of the company. Every employee is encouraged to speak up, listen, be respectful of other opinions, and embrace criticism as just another avenue for great ideas."

Specifically talking about employees here, but I can see how it might seem somewhat hypocritical. However, in context of Blizzard's other core principals, including "Gameplay First" and "Think Globally," I think this decision is totally in keeping with their stated morals. Blizzard was obviously seeking to avoid offending their global audiences and keep their tournaments focused on the games rather than the opinions of the players. This was actually a great precedent to set so that politics would never again be a problem for Blizzard, so I'm sad to see it backpedal.

[Neutraligon]

And like I said, it could cover anything remotely controversial...or not. Based on that rule, they could state they won because they used thus and such mouse and it could still get them banned.

That's how that stuff works.

Then they should have kept it consistent, since the American team, doing the same thing was not so punished.

[Bloodshade]

Blizzard doesn't want to get on China's bad side because of how lucrative it is to get into the Chinese market. There's just simply so much more money to be made in China than in the US, so long as they can manage to not get banned from China.

I do believe the US is currently on track to dethrone China as the world's largest gaming market this year for a number of reasons. Still, to companies like Blizzard, the Chinese market is not something to be ignored so easily as it has the potential to become a cash cow if they play by the rules.

From my perspective, there's a fight going on between state capitalism and free market capitalism.

[Neutraligon]

BLizzard lists out what they consider their own core principals. Speech is covered.

Yes, I found the core principles. I believe you're referring to one called "Every Voice Matters." Quote:

"Great ideas can come from anywhere. Blizzard Entertainment is what it is today because of the voices of our players and of each member of the company. Every employee is encouraged to speak up, listen, be respectful of other opinions, and embrace criticism as just another avenue for great ideas."

Specifically talking about employees here, but I can see how it might seem somewhat hypocritical. However, in context of Blizzard's other core principals, including "Gameplay First" and "Think Globally," I think this decision is totally in keeping with their stated morals. Blizzard was obviously seeking to avoid offending their global audiences and keep their tournaments focused on the games rather than the opinions of the players. This was actually a great precedent to set so that politics would never again be a problem for Blizzard, so I'm sad to see it backpedal.

If things are think globally, then this is still hypocritical, as it does not think about people who are fighting against the Chinese government. They have not punished people for comments on Pride for instance.

[The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile]

Then they should have kept it consistent, since the American team, doing the same thing was not so punished.

They were most likely not punished because of the huge backlash. Blizzard was likely in damage control mode and figured that it'd only be digging into a deeper hole by administering more punishments.

If things are think globally, then this is still hypocritical, as it does not think about people who are fighting against the Chinese government.

The point of thinking globally is not to favor one side over the other, but to avoid talking about it at all.

[Neutraligon]

Then they should have kept it consistent, since the American team, doing the same thing was not so punished.

They were most likely not punished because of the huge backlash. Blizzard was likely in damage control mode and figured that it'd only be digging into a deeper hole by administering more punishments.

They would be digger a deeper whole no matter what since if they did punish them, they would at least be consistent, by not punishing them they have shown that they are in fact not consistent with their punishments. This makes the rule they are using seem highly arbitrary.

As to your edit, nope thinking globally does not mean not supporting one side or the other, it means just that to think about the globe, which of course includes various sides in an issue. If they wanted to keep politics out, they could have made a rule explicitly disallowing that they did not.

[Blueflarst]

Personally i support Blizzard actions, gaming tournaments should not be used to promote politics as it can not only ruin the company but the diversion of millions of people for political problems.
Maybe they were very harsh suspending afull year the player but definitely he deserved a sanction.

Politics are politics and games and torunmanets should be kept off this
I know the chinese repression in Hong Kong is not good but a tournament is not the place to denounce it. He could have spoke againist China out of the tournament without involving the company and the players inside the tournament. But he had to use it for hisrj political end

TO(URNAMENTS AND GAMES SHOULD BE KEEP OUT OF POLITICS

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Personally i support Blizzard actions, gaming tournaments should not be used to promote politics as it can not only ruin the company but the diversion of millions of people for political problems.
Maybe they were very harsh suspending afull year the player but definitely he deserved a sanction.

Politics are politics and games and torunmanets should be kept off this
I know the chinese repression in Hong Kong is not good but a tournament is not the place to denounce it. He could have spoke againist China out of the tournament without involving the company and the players inside the tournament. But he had to use it for hisrj political end

TO(URNAMENTS AND GAMES SHOULD BE KEEP OUT OF POLITICS

Politics have been in games for a long time now, that ship sailed decades ago.

[The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile]

They would be digger a deeper whole no matter what since if they did punish them, they would at least be consistent, by not punishing them they have shown that they are in fact not consistent with their punishments. This makes the rule they are using seem highly arbitrary.

Yes, I agree that the better course would have been the punishment of the American protestors. I was merely supplying the likely reason why Blizzard did what it did.

As to your edit, nope thinking globally does not mean not supporting one side or the other, it means just that to think about the globe, which of course includes various sides in an issue. If they wanted to keep politics out, they could have made a rule explicitly disallowing that they did not.

Obviously we have different interpretations, then. I would conclude that to think globally, one would attempt to cater not just to one audience but to all possible audiences. In order to do so, controversy must be minimized.

And, I mean, it was literally in the tournament rules:
"Engaging in any act that, in Blizzard’s sole discretion, brings you into public disrepute, offends a portion or group of the public, or otherwise damages Blizzard image [is not allowed]."
Regardless of vagueness, I'm pretty sure that the player in question could comprehend that saying "Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our age" would be interpreted as offensive to a certain large segment of the population.

[Valentine Z]

As someone who plays Overwatch rather frequently, I don't know how to feel about this anymore.

Don't get me wrong, I am disgusted by their slew of decisions, and I am going to watch the thing unfold, with Blizzcon to be as awkward as possible.

I'm guessing that I could still enjoy OW as a game since I bought it, but until they clean up their act, I guess I can stop giving Blizzard money?

Personally i support Blizzard actions, gaming tournaments should not be used to promote politics as it can not only ruin the company but the diversion of millions of people for political problems.
Maybe they were very harsh suspending afull year the player but definitely he deserved a sanction.

Politics are politics and games and torunmanets should be kept off this
I know the chinese repression in Hong Kong is not good but a tournament is not the place to denounce it. He could have spoke againist China out of the tournament without involving the company and the players inside the tournament. But he had to use it for hisrj political end

TO(URNAMENTS AND GAMES SHOULD BE KEEP OUT OF POLITICS

The apolitical nature of Blizzard as a whole stopped when they talked about how they are going to maintain the dignity of China and all... over "Free Hong Kong".

[Bear Stearns]

Personally i support Blizzard actions, gaming tournaments should not be used to promote politics as it can not only ruin the company but the diversion of millions of people for political problems.
Maybe they were very harsh suspending afull year the player but definitely he deserved a sanction.

Politics are politics and games and torunmanets should be kept off this
I know the chinese repression in Hong Kong is not good but a tournament is not the place to denounce it. He could have spoke againist China out of the tournament without involving the company and the players inside the tournament. But he had to use it for hisrj political end

TO(URNAMENTS AND GAMES SHOULD BE KEEP OUT OF POLITICS

Politics have been in games for a long time now, that ship sailed decades ago.

What politics exist in say...Madden? Are kneeling players going to be in the game now?

[Legation Cities of Asia]

What do you see in Pakistan? They are becoming cosy with China as they both seek to piss off India in whatever ways they can. The China/India scuffle could still happen.

I’m not saying Pakistan is the perfect ally, but they’re a strategic one. Pakistan has historically been a friend of the US, since its independence in 1947. Plus, the relationship between the two nations has been mutually beneficial, the US giving Pakistan foreign aid and Pakistan letting the US put military bases in their territory. And it doesn’t like to do major human rights violations and monarchical theocracies like the Saudis. At this point, Iran actually has the moral high ground over Saudi Arabia.

yeah, we gave them aid, which Pakistan used to fund groups like Al-Qaeda and the Taliban

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Politics have been in games for a long time now, that ship sailed decades ago.

What politics exist in say...Madden? Are kneeling players going to be in the game now?

Games in general, not every single game in existence, you know what I meant.

[Bear Stearns]

What politics exist in say...Madden? Are kneeling players going to be in the game now?

Games in general, not every single game in existence, you know what I meant.

I think politics in game is a recent thing, and historically hasn't been true outside of games that were intentionally political. Unless you're going to say here that Pac-Man, Sonic, Super Mario, Asteroids, Space Pinball, the Sims, Halo, and others had some political bent to them.

And the issue with Blizzard is about a political event that happened outside of the game.

[Duhon]

blizzard, like any company catering to a market as big as china is, is simply doing the math and weighing lives according to the utilitarian calculus

one man to serve ten
ten men to serve a thousand
seven million to serve more than a billion

indeed, what company would not sacrifice entire peoples for its raison d'etre? you'd do it too, and gladly too -- it's just a matter of you not seeing the results so you don't get all emotional and glassy-eyed and wanting to join them and away from this shitty shitty world

you would perhaps protest that companies have people in it
and?

[Kowani]

Games in general, not every single game in existence, you know what I meant.

I think politics in game is a recent thing, and historically hasn't been true outside of games that were intentionally political. Unless you're going to say here that Pac-Man, Sonic, Super Mario, Asteroids, Space Pinball, the Sims, Halo, and others had some political bent to them.

And the issue with Blizzard is about a political event that happened outside of the game.

Sonic had multiple political bents, even if we ignore the comics.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Games in general, not every single game in existence, you know what I meant.

I think politics in game is a recent thing, and historically hasn't been true outside of games that were intentionally political. Unless you're going to say here that Pac-Man, Sonic, Super Mario, Asteroids, Space Pinball, the Sims, Halo, and others had some political bent to them.

And the issue with Blizzard is about a political event that happened outside of the game.

Politics in games isn’t even remotely a recent thing, the Metal Gear series, for example, has been doing the whole politics in gaming thing since the 80s since Kojima has used the series to insert political messages. Any game or game series that features any kind of war, conflict, espionage, societal turmoil, dystopian futures, international (or sometimes intergalactic) geopolitical dealings, etc. has a political bend of some degree to it.

I know this, politics in the gaming world in general has also existed for decades, this is another example of that fact.

[The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile]

Politics in games isn’t even remotely a recent thing, the Metal Gear series, for example, has been doing the whole politics in gaming thing since the 80s since Kojima has used the series to insert political messages. Any game or game series that features any kind of war, conflict, espionage, societal turmoil, dystopian futures, international (or sometimes intergalactic) geopolitical dealings, etc. has a political bend of some degree to it.

I know this, politics in the gaming world in general has also existed for decades, this is another example of that fact.

Promoting a message, political or philosophical is an attribute common to nearly all art forms, including video games.

That is, however, entirely different than using a video game as a platform to explicitly comment on a current political event which has nothing to do with the video game in question.

[Bombadil]

Blizzard is hardly the only company and of the examples I would say it has some justification for banning a player for shouting out a political message in a tournament.

However people really must stand up to a nation that bans an entire industry because one of their GMs wrote a message on their own personal Twitter account. I can't imagine the emails that have gone out in MNCs requesting no one comment on HK on their own social channels for risk of being fired. People have already been fired and so China buys silence through self-censorship.

So millions of people are silenced on purportedly free western online media platforms, platforms that are banned in China as it is, while WeChat and TikTok are free to spread overseas.

At some point it must become unacceptable.

[The Noviaskiet]

China’s long running effort to suppress freedom and democracy has reached as far as to touch the Gaming world? I wish I could say I was suprised.

[Risastorstein]

The US's first and foremost greatest allies will always be our kith and kin. Is it any coincidence that our greatest allies are Australia and the United Kingdom, followed by Canada. The only non-Anglo country that actually gives a shit about America is Poland.

Everyone else is a liability, or in the case of Israel, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, an enemy.

I mean, we the French tried to warn you about the Iraq war unlike these so-called allies (more like blind followers).